Human-Centred Political Economy

The book, The
Production and Reproduction of Value and Its
Realization by K.C. Adams will be published soon. It elaborates
human-centred economic theory as an alternative to capital-centred
economic theory by presenting the modern terms, expressions and
approach
used by the Communist Party of Canada (Marxist-Leninist). The book is
an
important contribution to the work to change the direction of the
economy
and usher in the new. For instance, to wage the ideological struggle
against
the neo-liberal defeatist world outlook when analyzing economic
developments
or writing economic articles, it is of utmost importance to oppose
imperialist
and capital-centred theory and its terms and expressions.

Capital-centred political economy
hypothesizes instruments
of production such as buildings and machines as fixed capital, and
material
wholly consumed in the production process as circulating capital. This
hypothesis is necessary to distort the social consciousness of the
working class
and middle strata. The hypothesis places means of production as capital
to
instil in the brains of workers and intellectuals the notion that
capital is the
driving and necessary force in the creation of modern means of
production and
the production of all goods and services. Without capital no modern
production would occur is the story workers are told endlessly.

This hypothesis is a fraud. Means of production are the
product of the
work-time of those human beings who make them. Capital is a social
relation
that enslaves the actual producers, the working class, to owners of
capital. The
working class in the social relation is the actual producer of goods
and services
including means of production but does not own or control what it
produces.

Means of production of
pre-capitalist economic formations were the
products of the actual producers of those systems back to communal and
pre-class times. Capital was not necessary at those times to produce
means of
production and is not needed in contemporary times, which is the time
of the
working class.

Owners of capital were only necessary as a social force
to move society
out of feudal petty scattered production and introduce the generalized
use of
science and technology to production. Once the move was complete their
existence as a social class became unnecessary. The time when they
became
obsolete has long passed. The working class is the social force now
necessary
to complete the transition from petty scattered production to
industrial mass
integrated production on a global scale governed with new relations of
production in harmony with the socialized economy.

The terminology based on
capital was necessary to
explain the new
political economy of capital in contrast to pre-capitalist economic
formations,
in particular feudal relations of production. This theory was developed
to meet
the requirements of the working class in its nascent form. As the
working class
matured and became capable as a social force to move society to
socialism
past the transitional economic formation of capitalism, it became
necessary to
develop a new human-centred political economy.

Imperialist propaganda now
often refers to fixed capital as costs. This
degeneration reflects the wrecking, retrogression, parasitism, decay
and war
that have become constant features of the imperialist economy.
Imperialist
theory reflects the degeneration in the economic base and the
imperialist
politics, which is fighting to retain the transitional form of
capitalism against
its necessary transformation to the new.

The working class is now
charged with the responsibility
to develop its
theory consistent with the need of the working class to assume its
central and
leading political, economic and social position in society. In the
economic
terms that have been developed to date, which are referred to as
human-centred political economy, means of production are not fixed
capital
and certainly not fixed costs but fixed transferred-value.

The use of capital-centred or imperialist terms serves
to block the adoption
of the terms, expressions and theory of human-centred political
economy. It
is a form of promoting anti-consciousness. The working class movement
cannot afford to cling to capital-centred and imperialist theory, terms
and expressions. Rather, it must participate in developing new theory
suitable for the twenty-first century and a mature working class, a
social class ready and poised to lead the world forward to socialism,
the emancipation of the working class, and the elimination of social
classes and class society.

How Does the Issue of Inequality Pose Itself?

There is a lot of talk nowadays about creating a just
society by addressing income inequality or inequality of opportunity.
All of it serves to cover up that so long as the aim of society is to
pay the rich, make the most powerful monopolies competitive on global
markets and push a vicious neo-liberal anti-social offensive to
eliminate all traces of a public authority in favour of monopoly right,
the rich will get richer and the poor poorer. Obscene wealth is
accumulating at one pole while the ranks of the poor increase,
including the percentage of people in abject poverty. Far from
addressing inequality, it has become enshrined.

First, it is important to take note of what is meant
when speaking of inequality. Inequality is both natural and social.
Inequality stems from the vast variety of natural abilities of
individuals, and the class privilege that permeates the capitalist
social system and its division between the working class and owners of
accumulated social wealth. Natural inequality is related to natural
ability. Social inequality is related to social class privilege either
inherited through hereditary right or acquired through natural right.

Natural inequality of
individuals is not something to change or abuse but rather nurture so
that everyone finds their place in society and contributes to the best
of their abilities. Society must guarantee the flowering of the natural
ability of all and not allow class privilege to negate or misuse it for
narrow self-serving purposes. This can be accomplished if social
inequality or class privilege is restricted and those in the ruling
elite are deprived of the power to use the state and their positions of
economic and political control to oppress and exploit others and
deprive them of their rights and needs.

Myriad statistical studies reveal that class status has
a profound effect on natural ability and whether it blossoms or withers
and dies. Social inequality negates the broad development of individual
ability, which for many individuals is lost to them, the general
interests of society and the public good. The working class and its
political representatives reject this waste and fight for the rights of
all and their empowerment. People have rights by virtue of being human;
fundamental to this is the right of each and all to contribute to
society to the best of their abilities and in return have society in a
harmonious way guarantee their rights and needs.

When members of the working class with natural ability
or for other reasons break through the glass ceiling of class privilege
so to speak, such as President Obama, they are encouraged through
wealth and status to join the ruling capitalist elite ideologically and
politically, and use their new-found class privilege to consolidate
their positions and that of other members of the ruling class in
opposition to the working class.

The negation of social inequality for selected
individuals of the working class paradoxically strengthens and
consolidates social inequality within society as a whole. It nurtures a
section of working people dedicated to their new-found class privilege,
who use their own acquired substantial resources and influence and the
power of the state to deprive the collective of humanity from
exercising its right to be according to everyone's abilities and needs,
and the interests of society. Members of this section become ideologues
for social inequality and class privilege, as they, through natural
right have negated their own individual social inequality and gained
the "American" or "Canadian" dream, and now trumpet their new-found
class privilege with fanatical zeal.

The leader of the federal Liberal Party, Justin Trudeau,
who inherited his social class privilege, is quoted in the Huffington Post saying:

"The greatest of these principles [of the Liberal Party]
is equality of opportunity. It is key to all the others. To be
successful, we Liberals need to be the voice for the millions of
Canadians who share this belief, who believe that in a fair society,
hard work should pay off. [...]

"Leadership is about setting priorities based on
principle. I believe that there is no more important principle than
equality of opportunity -- and the progress it generates -- for
individual Canadians, and for Canada."

Trudeau wants to change inequality of opportunity so
that certain individuals through natural right can join Canadians like
himself who have either inherited positions of power and class
privilege through hereditary right or acquired their positions, wealth
and power through natural right. Trudeau says inequality of opportunity
negates the possibility of people, especially those who are hard
working and possess ability, fulfilling their dream of upward mobility
to either professional status with high incomes or becoming owners of
accumulated social wealth and leaving behind the working class not only
in class position but also importantly in thinking, outlook, ideology
and politics.

According to Trudeau, unfair inequality of opportunity
causes yet more inequality and loss of hope in the Canadian dream of
acquiring social wealth and class privilege. The solution is "equality
of opportunity" or "intergenerational mobility" to strengthen the
status quo of class privilege and collective inequality through keeping
alive the dream of negating social inequality for those who work hard
or who in a banal way overcome it by winning a lottery or engaging in
criminal activity and corrupt practices.

The neo-liberal position on inequality denies its
reality within the natural and social conditions. Natural inequality is
not a human weakness but a source of great strength and possibility for
the advance of all human beings and the general interests of society.
Social inequality and class privilege are expressions of the division
of society into antagonistic social classes. It will persist as a
backward condition of life for as long as social classes and class
privilege remain intact.

The ruling class uses its accumulated social wealth and
capitalist state to deprive working people of their rights and block
them from opening a door to progress towards democratic renewal and
their empowerment, and from creating conditions of social equality and
the flowering of all: From each and all according to their abilities,
to each and all their rights and needs guaranteed by society.

The neo-liberal way perpetuates social inequality and
class privilege.

All
Out for People's Empowerment and Democratic Renewal!
Our Future Lies in the Fight for the Rights of All!

Why All the Fuss over Piketty's Book on
Political Economy?

- K.C. Adams -

Bourgeois media have caused quite a stir over Thomas
Piketty's book Capital in the Twenty-First Century since it
was
published in
September 2013. Piketty is a professor at the École des hautes
études en
sciences sociales (EHESS) and professor at the Paris School of
Economics,
both in France. The media's promotion of Professor Piketty's 695-page
book
on political economy is not surprising as it defends the capitalist
status quo
and neo-liberal globalization. The Guardian proclaimed him "certainly
the most
influential intellectual of 2014," while the Financial Times called his
book the
"business book of the year"; The Economist crowned him the "Marx of
modern times," and the German press has devoted many pages to him. AFP
goes so far as to describe these fawning accolades as "Pikettymania,"
noting
that his sold-out seminars have earned him the standing of a "rock star
of the
economy," whatever that means.

This "Pikettymania" is not
reserved for the monopoly media. Piketty has
also been received by Obama's advisers and given standing by at least
two
Nobel Prize winners, Paul Krugman and Joseph Stiglitz. He outlined his
thesis
via Skype to Bill Gates, AFP also reports.

Shocking perhaps is that this infantile adoration for
the man and his book
extends to certain social forces claiming to be progressive. They seem
to have
not listened to Piketty's own words in interviews with the CBC and
elsewhere.
"Making more people capitalists and owners, that is exactly what I am
pushing
for," he said in a May 23, 2014 interview with Amanda Lang on CBC's
"The
Lang & O'Leary Exchange."

So, why all the fuss over Piketty's book on political
economy?

His own description of the content and that of the
hundreds of reviews
show that perchance these forces who consider themselves progressives
were
taken in by the clever marketing ploy to have the book appear similar
to the
early editions of Karl Marx's Capital even to the point of using
comparable
fonts.

In his book Piketty sings the praises of neo-liberal
globalization and
monopoly capitalism. He certainly does not shy away from repeating his
reactionary views whenever asked. As if excusing himself to the
authorities by
showing his credentials as a loyal member of the ruling elite, he
swears his
major policy objective of a global tax on wealth is both to relieve
pressure
coming from the very poor, which threatens to explode in anger, and to
save
neo-liberal globalization from those who might be dreaming of an
alternative.
"The risk [of extreme inequality]," Piketty added in his interview on
CBC, "is
that some countries will choose to turn against globalization."

Have these forces, which call themselves progressive
become so stunned
within the retreat of revolution that the mere mention of "inequality"
in society
makes them lose their bearings? Whatever personal contributions they or
their
parents have made to humanity during the last 150 years in the fight to
move
society forward amount to a hill of beans for Professor Piketty. In his
fanciful
world, he is oblivious to the human factor and its central decisive
role. Rising
productivity cures all that ails society according to Piketty, and if a
snag is met
and monopoly capital becomes too big for its britches, a destructive
war or
devastating economic crisis will set it straight. Relations of
production? What
are those? It appears the professor believes a slave exists without a
slave
master, a serf without a landlord, and a worker under capitalism
without a
capitalist.

Such a book has no connection with historical reality,
the working class
or with any people fighting for their rights. It seeks to inspire those
forces
detached from the needs of the people, history and the revolutionary
movement. The professor dismisses as inconsequential the efforts of all
those
in the trade union and popular movements not to mention the communist
movement. Gone from the historical record is the 1871 Paris Commune and
the 1917 Great October Socialist Revolution; wiped clean from memory is
the
first attempt to build a nation under the control of the working class
and
peasants as defined by Lenin and Stalin, which resulted in the direct
contradiction between socialism and capitalism, the flow of revolution
and the
spread of the communist movement throughout the world and an upsurge of
the people's resistance. Gone as well from Piketty's capital-centred
outlook is
the revolt in the colonies; disappeared are the heroic efforts of all
those who
united to defend themselves and others against fascism and militarism,
which
ended in the people's victory in 1945.

Not only is the memory wiped clean but also the
summation and
theoretical advances towards Contemporary Marxist-Leninist Thought.
Piketty
reduces all to a study of growth in the productive forces compared to
whatever
existed before without comment on the intervention of the people and
their
consciousness to change the situation in their favour.

Absent is the fundamental contradiction of class society
between the forces
of production and the attendant relations amongst those who acquire
their
living within the specific historical conditions. The dialectic of
definite social
forces within specific historical conditions is absent in Piketty's
book and
replaced with the notion of constantly rising productivity and
inequality with
periodic episodes of destruction of capital in the modern era through
war and
economic crises.

To declare that social inequality exists within class
society is certainly not
earthshaking or enlightening. The earliest division of humanity into
contending
classes immediately brought forth social inequality amongst classes and
a state
that enforces the exploitation of the oppressed class and the
domination of the
ruling class. To eliminate social inequality and class privilege
requires the
emancipation of the working class and the elimination of classes and
class
society. Piketty contends without hesitation that such a development
would not
be good, because for people to be inventive or entrepreneurial,
according to
him, requires the prospect of becoming rich, powerful and privileged.
To
perpetuate the status quo and not allow the human factor/social
consciousness
to gain traction amongst the working class, a powerful state is needed
to
entrench class privilege and the inequality of the exploited, and block
the
resistance of the working class from maturing and gaining its own
independent
human-centred outlook on political, economic and social affairs.
Piketty
imagines no other alternative motive force is possible because his mind
is
stuck within the capitalist relations of production from which he sees
no
advancement.

To identify in precise terms the social force within the
historical conditions
that can lead society forward to new social relations in harmony with
the
advanced productive forces is necessary and noteworthy. That is what
Marx
did in his writings, identifying the modern proletariat as the only
force capable
of leading the building of the new. Marx not only wrote about it, he
led the
working class in practical politics to bring the new into being,
providing it
with an advanced ideology and social consciousness as a guide to action.

That is what Lenin did in organizing the working class
of Russia to lead
the masses out of the horrors of World War One and into a
nation-building
project under the control of the worker and peasant state. That is what
Hardial
Bains did in Canada. He led the communist and workers' movement to re-
establish its Marxist-Leninist revolutionary side in opposition to
revisionist
collaboration and liquidation. Internationally this revisionism and
liquidationism was most clearly seen in the degeneration and collapse
of the
Soviet Union into pseudo-socialism and social imperialism in the 1960s.
Comrade Bains led the working class and its allies towards building the
new,
firmly upholding the human factor/social consciousness in all their
revolutionary work.

The world is in the period
of the retreat of revolution. That is no reason
to go crazy unconcerned and abandon our forebears who gave us so much
in
the practice and theory of revolution. Just like them during the
previous period
of the flow of revolution, it is up to us to analyze the objective
conditions
calmly and mobilize the working class to defend its rights and organize
for an
alternative that favours the people. It brings nobody honour to run
after the
latest bourgeois fad in political and economic affairs.

Piketty says the data he has gathered using powerful
computers show the
rate of return on capital (r) is greater than the rate of economic
growth (g) and
inevitably leads to concentration of wealth in fewer hands and greater
inequality. Hardly a dramatic insight. How does stating the obvious
assist the
working class with the serious business of organizing for change
towards the
new? Instead of hailing Piketty, the forces who now bow at his altar
should
ask him to explain why the rate of return on capital would enjoy such
an
increase against the law of a falling rate of profit that forces a
diminishing
return on capital because of productivity and the rebellion of the
people in
defence of their rights and against exploitation.

Without admitting the damaging consequences of its
actions, monopoly
right has forced its will against the economic laws of capitalism and
uses the
power of the state to have its way. To overcome the law of a falling
rate of
profit, to defeat its competitors at home and abroad and those who
resist its
rule, monopoly capital wages predatory wars to steal from weaker
nations,
invents all sorts of financial shenanigans to fleece the unsuspecting
including
even fellow members of its social class, seizes markets, raw material
and
workers to exploit and regions to dominate in direct challenges to its
competitors, the people and the natural environment, for which even
Piketty
admits the chickens eventually come home to roost. Monopoly capital is
driven
by anti-consciousness with regard to the devastating effects of its
actions,
which result in greater economic crises and global conflict. Its
private interests
overwhelm all other thinking and considerations.

Monopoly capital is in a constant battle against the
working class,
competitors and the law of a falling rate of profit and it does not
care what
harm or catastrophes it causes to satisfy its narrow private interests.
Monopoly
capital refuses to solve any problem facing the people and economy
because
it is too busy sorting out how to circumvent the law of a falling rate
of profit
and crush all who threaten its empire no matter how dire the
consequences
may be.

Piketty drags us through a description of what he
fancies went on during
the past and what he imagines will transpire in the future. All this
activity
occurs it seems without any participation of the people in defending
their
rights, without any organized conscious class struggle of the working
class to
improve its claim on the value it produces and to build the new,
without any
rebellions of the colonies and without much thought given to exactly
how
monopoly capital manages to circumvent the economic law of a falling
rate of
profit and the disastrous effects this brings to society.

The only thing of importance to Piketty is that "r" was
and remains greater
than "g" for better or worse subjected only to an occasional policy
objective
such as his global wealth tax, economic crisis and war, and that is the
last
word on the matter of where we are and where humanity is heading. In
his
world, the dialectics of nature, class struggle and the human
factor/social
consciousness have played and play no role, and some people to their
shame
have fallen for this fraud.

"R" can only be greater than "g," if monopoly right has
its way and leads
the people of the world to oblivion. "R" can only be greater than "g,"
if the
working class does not organize itself and lead its allies to uphold
public right
and deprive monopoly right of its power to block the people from
building the
new.

The working class has had enough of this capital-centred
thinking and
economics; it needs and demands its own independent thinking and human-
centred economics. Understanding of economics and politics comes from
acts
of finding out through acts of conscious participation in organized
class
struggle to build the new. Only within the cauldron of organized
revolutionary
struggle can the working class find a way forward.

In the News

France

Descent into Unprecedented State of
Anarchy and Violence

- Pauline Easton -

As horrendous as the attack on the French magazine Charlie
Hebdo was, most alarming is the fact that France has descended
into an
unprecedented state of anarchy and violence. The people are held
hostage to
its crisis-ridden measures which only further deepen the all-sided
crisis in
which France is mired.

On January 7, according to reports, two gunmen broke
into the offices of
satirical French magazine Charlie Hebdo in Paris and opened
fire,
killing 12 people and wounding 11 others. Numerous arrests were made
throughout France while the police conducted a manhunt. By the end of
the
week, a full-scale occupation of the community of Dammartin-en-Goele,
35
kilometers northeast of Paris, where the two suspects were said to have
held
hostages in an industrial building, resulted in the killing of the two
suspects
by police forces. Meanwhile, all kinds of other attacks,
hostage-taking, killings
and bomb alerts occurred simultaneously throughout France, including
attacks
on mosques; the killing of a 25-year old police officer and wounding of
a
municipal worker in Montrouge, a southern suburb of Paris; and the
attack on
a supermarket at Porte de Vincennes, east of Paris, where an armed man
took
at least five hostages. The siege at Porte de Vincennes lasted three
hours and
ended with the killing of the suspect and four hostages.

Results of a grenade
attack on a kebab restaurant in Villefranche-sur-Saone, January 8,
2015.
This is just one of the instances of anarchy and violence
breaking out in France following the attack on Charlie Hebdo.

Following the January 7 attack, French authorities
raised the national terror
alert to its highest level and deployed soldiers in Paris through the
public
transport system, at media offices, mosques and other places of
worship. Repeated demonstrations have been convoked at Place de la
République in Paris, including a gathering of 35,000 people on
the day of the attack, as well as in Toulouse, Nice, Lyon, Marseille
and Rennes. This has all been accompanied by massive media
disinformation about the suspects' motives, links and whereabouts as
well as official hysteria and confusion-mongering about the nature of
the attack and how the danger to the people poses itself.

The police mobilizations, lock-downs and occupations of
entire
neighbourhoods are a tragic reminder for the French people of the state
of
powerlessness they experienced during the occupation of France in
1940-44.

What to make of these events? A hue and cry has been
raised about the
need to protect freedom of expression. Canada's Prime Minister said the
only
aim of those who committed these barbaric acts "is to usurp the rights
of
freedom-loving people everywhere, including the fundamental right of
freedom
of expression." "This barbaric act, along with recent attacks in
Sydney,
Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu, and Ottawa, is a grim reminder that no
country is
immune to the types of terrorist attacks we have seen elsewhere around
the
world... Canada and its allies will not be intimidated and will
continue to stand
firmly together against terrorists who would threaten the peace,
freedom and
democracy our countries so dearly value. Canadians stand with France on
this
dark day," the Prime Minister's statement said.

French police at the
site of a grenade attack on a mosque in Le Mans,
January 8, 2015.

He was joined by Quebec Premier Philippe Couillard who
said "never shall
we bow to these acts of intimidation, violence and hatred." The entire
French
language media in Quebec joined in what they called an act of
solidarity with Charlie Hebdo by printing cartoons
desecrating
the Prophet Muhammad,
claiming it was to defend freedom of expression. Newspaper headlines
declared the attack on Charlie Hebdo "An Act of War" and
cried
out "Freedom of Expression Under Attack" and "Growing Fear of
Islamophobia." The usual expert panels of Radio-Canada and TVA were
brought in to demand more security measures and justify the assault of
governments such as the Harper dictatorship on privacy and other
rights.
English language media, including the CBC and The Montreal
Gazette, owned by Postmedia, did not carry the cartoons saying
their
policy is to respect the sensitivity of Muslims but they also described
it as an
attack on freedom of expression. In an editorial, the Gazette
said
the most fitting reply is Voltaire's famous declaration, "I may
disagree with
what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

Whatever stance these forces have decided to take to
show solidarity with
the victims of the attack on Charlie Hebdo, all of them have
in
common the view that the fight of the peoples of the world today is not
between the Old and the New but between an alleged good and an alleged
evil,
between allegedly progressive and civilized forces in the world who of
course
happen to be of European descent against an allegedly backward Islamic
fundamentalist world of terrorism. The fact that the methods used by
the so-called civilized world to fight the uncivilized world are the
same as those they claim to decry is to remain hidden. Those methods
have long been repudiated by the peoples of the world yet the so-called
civilized world admits to torture to secure intelligence, the use of
violence to sort out problems between nations, revenge-killings,
preventative arrests and indefinite detention. These are not methods to
secure the peace.
This is
outright state terrorism to further the aims of destabilizing rivals
and acquiring
spheres of influence. But besides this, what is most irrational, to say
the least,
is to speak of "freedom of speech" to promote a content such as that
carried
by Charlie Hebdo which contains not one shred of
enlightenment.

In fact, what is called the legitimate satirical content
of Charlie
Hebdo is not only despicable and pathetic but anti-social. It is
despicable
because it is designed to incite passions to gain notoriety. It is
pathetic because
it uses one of the great ideals of the enlightenment movement --
freedom of
speech -- to push obscurantism on a scale as great if not greater than
that used
by the Church in medieval times. It is anti-social because its aim is
to promote backwardness and fratricidal wars.

All of it reveals the profound crisis of the European
nation-state that has
been imposed on all countries in the world. While it emerged in the
great
struggle against medievalism in the European context, today it has been
dismantled only to be replaced with every medieval dictum possible,
such as
Might Makes Right and no power to the people; no rights, only
privileges, no
due process of any kind; only the ability of those who have usurped
power by force to declare people to be outlaws and suspend their rights
and do the same to entire countries and peoples. The
values and
state arrangements the reactionary forces are inciting the
intelligentsia in
Europe and the Anglo-American world to defend are totally out of whack
with
the requirements of the peoples of all countries in the world in the
twenty-first
century. Progress requires enlightenment. Is that not what the men and
women
of the Renaissance taught us when they ushered in the Age of Reason? Is
that
not what Voltaire was saying when he espoused the rights of man all
those
years ago?[1]

Shame on the official circles including the major
newspapers in Canada and Quebec for promoting backwardness and
obscurantism in the name of freedom of expression. If they believe in
such freedom
then
why do they not tolerate the promotion of what they call Islamic
terrorist
views? Who decides which views should be given freedom of expression?
That
is the question.

After the Second World War, no fascist views were to be
given freedom
of expression. Humanity so decided. It was written in their blood.
Today, those
who have seized power by force have overthrown all the enlightened
values
and views humanity has brought forth since feudalism was overthrown and
the
peoples striving for empowerment made their mark. Once again, it is the
peoples striving for empowerment who must prevail. The battle of
democracy must be fought all over again. Out with the Old! In with the
New!

Note

1. Regarding the Enlightenment, French Wikipedia
states:

"The Enlightenment was an intellectual movement launched
in Europe in
the eighteenth century (1715-1789), which aimed to overcome
obscurantism
and promote knowledge. Philosophers and intellectuals encouraged
science
through intellectual exchange and opposition to superstition,
intolerance and abuse of
Church and State. The term 'Enlightenment' was established by custom to
bring together the diverse manifestations of this set of aims, trends
of thought
or sensibilities and historical actors." (Translated by TML.)

Regarding the origin of "freedom of expression":

"Freedom of expression goes back to the Western world.
It is a secular tradition, republican and democratic, that began to
emerge in the late seventeenth century. Before, it was a freedom
reserved for royal authorities, stately or religious.

"Freedom of expression is probably more associated with
the French Revolution. The 1789 French revolutionaries claimed that
freedom because, for them, it was a fundamental freedom that was
essential to the establishment of the new regime. The French people
were freed from the trusteeship of absolute monarchy. Their
representatives in the National Assembly saw everyone, men and women,
as equal and having the same fundamental rights. In this sense, the
National Assembly passed the Declaration of the Rights of Man and
and of the Citizen, August 26, 1789. From then on, all the actions of
the
authorities had to respect the simple but fundamental rules enshrined
in the Declaration, which was intended to avoid the abuse of power.
French law does not recognize, strictly speaking, freedom of
expression, but articles of the Declaration implicitly show the idea of
'freedom of expression.' Article 10 says, 'No one should be anxious
about their opinions [...] provided their
demonstrations do not disturb the public order established by the law.'
Article 11 states, 'The free communication of thoughts and opinions is
one of the most precious rights of man; any citizen may therefore
speak, write and publish freely, subject to responsibility for the
abuse of this freedom as shall be defined by law.'" (Ensemble scolaire
Le Mirail de Bordeaux, translated by TML.)

(Photos: RT, Ouest France)

Rabid Demonization of
Popular Resistance as "Terrorism"

- Nathan Freeman -

Coupled with the unprecedented ramping-up of a
generalized atmosphere
of anarchy and violence as we have seen in France this week, is the
rabid
demonization of popular resistance as "terrorism" -- especially in
major zones
of military conflict across wide swaths of the Middle East. It has
never been
more imperative to continue categorically condemning actual terrorist
acts such
as the attack on Charlie Hebdo while differentiating such
outrages
from acts of just and necessary popular resistance as seen in Palestine.

There have been a number of attentats similar
to those in
Paris in the UK over the last several months, including the slaughter
in broad
daylight of a serving soldier near his base in the East End of London.
Government and the media there routinely hype each of these events as
"Islamic terrorism" to confound the legitimate resistance struggles
with
revenge-seeking and acts of random terror.

This week there is the chaos in France with three
distinct incidents
following the attack on Charlie Hebdo -- one at a Kosher
grocery
store, one near Charles de Gaulle airport and one near the Eiffel
Tower. The
authorities closed Paris' ring road, equivalent to closing the 401
through
Toronto. Amongst other objectives, that act seems aimed at isolating
the
biggest of the Muslim suburbs from "proper Frenchmen" inside the arrondissements.

A few weeks ago we saw the incidents at
St-Jean-sur-Richelieu and Ottawa
being used to hype up an entire atmosphere of anarchy, violence and
uncertainty. In Quebec in the wake of this week's Paris events, there
has been
a renewed demonizing of "Muslims" as evil outsiders. The U.S. and
Canadian
establishment are up to something very dark. Many are losing their
bearings
completely.

We condemn the latest terrorist outrages. We condemn
governments and
their stooges deliberately mixing up terrorism and acts of just and
necessary
popular resistance such as the Gazans' resistance to Israeli
aggression.
Regardless of their claims to be interested in protecting freedom of
speech,
those governments and their agencies have been fuelling the general
atmosphere of anarchy and violence, and are to be condemned first and
foremost for such incitements.

The Real Implications for People and Their Rights After
Attack
on Charlie Hebdo

- Anne Jamieson -

Whether or not the French state and/or "far right" are
implicated in the
attack on French magazine Charlie Hebdo on January 7, it
bears
certain similarities to the 9/11 terrorist attack on the U.S. World
Trade Centre
in 2001. As in the United States in 2001, the French monopoly
capitalists and
sections of the financial oligarchy (as well as those of the U.S and
Canada) are
taking full advantage of the attack on the magazine to obfuscate
things. They
have been at least partially successful so far in mobilizing people on
a racist
basis to support their agenda of interference and aggression in the
Middle East;
to escalate racist attacks against specific members of the population
at home;
and to intensify surveillance and control of the population as a whole.
All the
while, diverting attention from the increasingly severe economic and
political
crisis in which they are mired, in the hopes that they can make the
people pay
for the crises that they alone are responsible for.

It is informative to look at the history of the Charlie
Hebdo
(summarized by Wikipedia), in order to better clarify what
its role
has been -- intentionally or otherwise -- in promoting the above agenda.

Magazine Editors at First Appear to Be Progressive
"Leftists"

In 1996, three of the staff members/editors
of Charlie Hebdo
(François
Cavanna, Stéphane Charbonnier and Philippe Val) gathered and
filed 173,704
signatures of people who supported a ban on the Front National -- the
nationalist political party founded by Jean-Marie Le Pen in 1972,
characterized
as "far right" and "anti-immigrant" (specifically non-European
immigrants).
The proposed ban was on the basis that statements and policies of the
Front
National contravened five articles of the Declaration of the Rights of
Man and
of the Citizen (a document drawn up after the bourgeois democratic
revolution
of 1789 in France). In addition to the anti-immigrant stance of that
party, other
major policies included "economic protectionism" (support for
nationalization
of certain industries) and a strict "law and order" agenda. According
to Wikipedia, its policy toward deportations of
immigrants is "more
moderate today than it was at its most radical point in the 1990s."[1]

An About Face

The seemingly progressive stance of the
weekly, however, changed sharply around the year 2000, when one of its
journalists "was sacked after she had protested against a Philippe Val
article
which called Palestinians 'non-civilized.'" Then, in 2006, the magazine
reprinted the twelve racist cartoons of the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten
which ridiculed the Prophet
Muhammad,
engendering the "controversy" that deeply divided the people of
Denmark; it
also added more such cartoons of its own. A number of Islamic
organizations
sued the editor Val for publishing racist material.

Calling the cartoons "overt provocations," the French
President Jacques
Chirac stated, "Anything that can hurt the convictions of someone else,
in
particular religious convictions, should be avoided." Future President
Nicolas
Sarkozy, on the other hand, "sent a letter to be read in court
expressing his
support for the ancient French tradition of satire," while
François Hollande
"expressed his support for freedom of expression." In 2007, Val
was acquitted by the courts. The magazine published another provocative
edition in November 2011, following which their Paris office was
fire-bombed
in the middle of the night, and its website hacked. In September 2012,
the
magazine published yet more cartoons of Muhammad, some of them
pornographic, at which time "riot police surrounded the office to
protect it
from possible attacks."

On January 1, 2015, according to the New York
Post,
Charbonnier, the current editor of Charlie Hebdo published a
taunting cartoon entitled "Still no attacks in France," featuring "a
caricature of
a Muslim fighter saying, 'Just wait -- we have until the end of January
to
present our New Year's wishes.'" Then on January 7 came the mid-morning
attack on the magazine's editorial board.

According to International Business Times,
"the situation
could make for favorable polling numbers for Le Pen" whose party has
"reiterated its condemnation of Islam, and called for the reinstatement
of the
death penalty."

Cynical Use of Principle of "Free Speech"

Large
numbers of people have been mobilized to condemn the attack on Charlie
Hebdo, but not on the basis of getting to
the bottom of
what exactly happened, why it happened and who is responsible. Rather,
they
are being mobilized in an anti-conscious and hysterical manner to
believe that
they are supporting the principle of "free speech." The "free speech"
that the
editors of that magazine were claiming to uphold, which was tied to
their
stance that "they are against religion in general" was, in fact, based
on
libertarianism dating from the eighteenth century in France. Many of
the
cartoons
in Charlie Hebdo hearken back
to libertine novels of the eighteenth century
that
featured pornographic cartoons and prose depicting priests and nuns.

The claim to be exercising free speech by the editors of
Charlie
Hebdo in the twenty-first century, however, when the absolute rule
of
Church
and State has long since been abolished, is disingenuous at best. Is it
"standing
up for your rights" and "exercising the right to free speech" to attack
the
sensibilities of the members of a particular minority group in the
society?
Rather, exercising such a "right" is a libertarian license to do
exactly what one
feels like doing whether or not this be at the expense of other members
of the
society. In the final analysis, a libertarian call to the right to free
speech in the twenty-first century, is a call for bourgeois individual
rights at the expense
of
collective rights.

Human Rights Must Mean More than Bourgeois Individual
Rights

In writing about the issue of nation-building in
Canada,
Hardial Bains touches on the issue of the relation between individual
rights
and the collective rights of the members of a society in the
twenty-first century:

"There came a time when a break took place with the
medieval attitude;
people were then defined according to their individual rights ...The
aim
was set
so that all the resources available to society would be directed
towards the
greater glory of individual rights. However, this then blocked the
satisfaction of
collective rights."[2]

Harmonizing individual rights with those of the
collective rights of
everyone
else in the society can be realized only through formulating a new
Constitution
and developing a new political mechanism to make that possible.

Notes

1. According to Reseau Voltaire, which describes itself
as "a web of non-aligned press groups dedicated to the analysis of
international relations," Charlie Hebdo was established in
1992, with secret
funding from
the office of then French President François Mitterrand. Charlie
Hebdo was a member of Reseau Voltaire before withdrawing in 1997
over a disagreement with the network. At that time, Charlie Hebdo was
campaigning for a complete ban of the right-wing Front National (FN).
Meanwhile Reseau Voltaire defended the right to association of FN
members
while campaigning for the prohibition of its armed wing the DPS.
Thereafter,
the relationship between Charlie Hebdo and the network
deteriorated. Charlie Hebdo attributed the 9/11 attacks to Al
Qaeda and launched a vicious anti-Islamic campaign. For its part,
Reseau
Voltaire maintained that the official version of events was
impossible and
attributed the attacks to a faction of the U.S. military-industrial
lobby. Finally,
in 2007, the director of Charlie Hebdo became close to then
President Nicolas Sarkozy, giving instructions to remove the chairman
of
Reseau Voltaire, who then went into exile.

2. TML Weekly, January 3, 2015, No. 1.

References

"Nation-Building in Canada Can Mean Only One Thing," TML
Weekly, January 3, 2015, No. 1.

A False Flag Operation?

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, who was Assistant Secretary of
the Treasury in the
Reagan Administration and associate editor of the Wall Street
Journal, in an article posted on his website on January 8 wrote
that the
terrorist attack in Paris was a false flag operation "designed to shore
up
France's vassal status to Washington."

"The suspects can be both guilty and patsies. Just
remember all the
terrorist plots created by the FBI that served to make the terrorism
threat real
to Americans," he wrote.

He said that the French economy is suffering from the
U.S.-imposed
sanctions against Russia. "Shipyards are impacted from being unable to
deliver
Russian orders due to France's vassalage status to Washington, and
other
aspects of the French economy are being adversely impacted by sanctions
that
Washington forced its NATO puppet states to apply to Russia."

Dr. Roberts stated that French President François
Hollande this week said
that the sanctions against Russia should end. "This is too much foreign
policy
independence on France's part for Washington."

He added that the CIA has apparently resurrected a
policy that it followed
against Europeans during the post-WW II era when the U.S. spy agency
would
carry out attacks in European states and blame them on communist
groups.

Dr. Roberts said now the U.S. agencies have planned
false flag operations
in Europe to create hatred against Muslims and bring European countries
under the U.S. sphere of influence.

He noted that "the attack on Charlie Hebdo was
an inside job
and that people identified by NSA as hostile to the Western wars
against
Muslims are going to be framed for an inside job designed to pull
France
firmly back under Washington's thumb."

Fifth
Anniversary of Devastating Earthquake in Haiti

Haitians Step Up Their Fight for
Independence and Democracy

Protests in Canada
following the earthquake in Haiti denounce the cynical use of the
humanitarian crisis by Canada, the U.S. and France for self-serving
purposes.

On January 7, Ezili Danto, executive director of the
Haitian Lawyers'
Leadership Network, was interviewed on Vancouver Co-op Radio's Discussion.
Danto
gave
an
overview
of
the
situation
in
Haiti and
the important developments leading up to January 12, 2015, the
five-year
anniversary of the devastating 2010 earthquake and the date set for the
dissolution of Haiti's lower house of parliament. The following
excerpts from
her interview describe the growing movement of the Haitian people to
reclaim
their independence and democracy from U.S. rule and its crucial tasks
at this
time. Danto explained that January 12, 2015 appears to be a point of
convergence for the Haitian people in their struggle against the
U.S.-imposed
puppet presidency and military occupation and that 2015 brings the
possibility
of victories for Haiti in affirming its right to be.

Danto described the U.S.
military occupation since the 2004
U.S.-Canadian-French coup against the elected President Jean-Bertrand
Aristide and
explained how the occupation used the 2010 earthquake to strengthen its
hold
on Haiti:

"Right now we have had a U.S. occupation in Haiti since
2004 -- direct
U.S. occupation outsourced to the UN peacekeepers, in a country where
there
is less violence than the Dominican Republic, which is the other side
of the
island, in a country that has no war. The United States is in Haiti at
the
moment behind UN guns and NGO false benevolence. At the moment we are
at this conjuncture, where on January 12, 2015 the Parliament of Haiti
will
dissolve. Michel Martelly, the puppet president [was] put in power by
the U.S.
in 2010, right after the earthquake. There was a big earthquake that
happened
in Haiti on January 12, 2010. Right after that earthquake, 316,000
Haitians
were killed in less than a minute -- the greatest catastrophe the world
has
known in terms of numbers of people dead in that amount of time.

"It was at that time that the U.S.-led 'shock doctrine'
forced the Haitians
to go into elections, and the person that became president was a Compas
singer
named Michel Martelly, who was part of the Duvalierist cabal back in
1991.
He was someone who worked with the army, someone who was right wing,
probably someone who in normal times would not have been elected by
Haitians. Literally, there was less than 17 per cent of the population
voting,
and within that 17 per cent of the population that was voting, a lot of
the
ballots were blanks. Hillary Clinton, who was at that point in time
Secretary
of State under Barack Obama, flew down to Haiti and basically said to
the
Parliament leader, 'You ratify this [election] or lose your Visas' and
this has
been going on ever since.

"Now we're in 2015. Since Martelly has come into power,
he's basically
acted as a dictator, with the UN as his guns, taking the place of the
old Haitian
bloody army, and has never held elections for Parliament. He got into
power
in May of 2011. Normally the Parliament is made up of 30 Senators and
99
Deputies in the lower house. There was a third of this, only 20
Senators, at the
time that he got into power in May 2011. His first constitutional act
should
have been to hold elections for the other third of the Senate and for
local
offices and so forth.

"Since Michel Martelly has got into power in Haiti,
there have not been
any elections. The reasons why we wrote the piece that says what has to
happen is to impeach Martelly, is that for the last three years people
have been
on the streets, protesting against Martelly in various ways; he's held
four
Carnivals, but no elections. He's spent money on Carnivals, he's spent
money
on flying to various places, promoting a lot of what the United States
put him
in office for -- which is a neo-liberal economy, where you privatize
the public
assets, and where you have an export economy, and development is
tourism
where you take fishermen's land and give it to the wealthy tourist.
That's what
he calls development.

"So we're at a point right now where there's going to be
a dissolution of
Parliament on January 12, 2015, because there has not been an election.
There
have been two lawyers in Haiti and others who have brought many
corruption
charges against the Martelly family. There's a judge that died under
suspicious
circumstances; there were, until last week, many political prisoners.
So the
people are asking for those things to happen.

Demonstration calls
for resignation of Prime Minister Lamothe and President Martelly,
Port-au-Prince, December 13, 2014.

"As of right now we have a situation where the Prime
Minister of Haiti
has resigned due to the pressure on the streets; today the Supreme
Court
Justice has resigned because of this stuff; and Martelly is faced right
now with
only 20 Senators: they are at this moment the only functioning,
operating
Parliamentary branch, because the Deputies, the 92 that are left, are
out of
session, and when they come back in session, all their terms will be
over.
There will not be any Parliament, it is about to be dissolved.

"For a lot of demonstrators who were on the streets, the
Martelly
government along with the U.S.-trained, Canadian-trained Haitian police
have
been doing what they are doing in Ferguson, Missouri. They have
militarized
police that they have trained -- Haitian police -- and they have been
throwing
foul water, tear gas and so forth, at students and those people
protesting the
Duvalierist-type dictatorship in Haiti that has been implanted by the
international community, and the OAS and those that are doing this
legitimizing of the elections to have a front that we have a democracy.

"What we said at the Haitian Lawyers' Leadership Network
is that in order
to avoid bloodshed and further unconstitutionality, the best thing for
the
Senate, which is the only legal authority that's left, is to impeach
Martelly. We
are under occupation, and all elections, we believe, are delegitimized,
but the
Senate is one of the only legal spaces in place where Haitians could
say:
'Based on the Haitian Constitution, the people have taken a referendum,
this
illegal person, we want him out, we want the corruption gone.' We
thought
that in order to avoid the bloodshed, the best thing to do is for those
20
Senators to come together and impeach Martelly.

"But I think that the situation has gone way past that
at the moment. We
wrote this two weeks ago. The situation is moving very fast. At the
moment
we are told that there are U.S. Marines that have landed in Haiti
yesterday. We
don't know if they are there to keep Martelly in power, or if they're
there to
take him out on a plane to go the way that Duvalier went back in 1986."

Danto described the state of the popular forces in Haiti
today and the
demands of the movement of the people against the U.S occupation:

"[Jean-Bertrand Aristide] was the first democratically
elected Haitian
President. [Fanmi Lavalas] is his political party. But since 2004, when
he was
taken on a plane by U.S. special forces and deported back to Africa,
the Fanmi
Lavalas political party has not been allowed to go for elections.
President
Aristide returned to Haiti seven years after the coup d'etat of 2004.
Haiti has
a very politicized people; they are very participatory about what is
going on
in their country. The reason that we have this sort of convergence of
things
happening -- this pushing of Martelly and Lamothe to resign to the
point
where the resignation is close -- is because of the popular movement.
And that
popular movement includes what is generally known as the Lavalas
Movement,
which is larger than the political party of President Aristide. It is
the entirety
of pro-democracy folks in Haiti, who may come from different points of
view,
but who are about not having dictatorship and institutionalizing the
rule of
law.

"[Senator Moïse Jean-Charles] is one of the most
vocal folks who are
leading the people on the streets right now to talk about a couple of
things.

"What they are asking for is the resignation of the
puppet government of
Haiti, for the MINUSTAH, the UN 'peacekeeping' force in Haiti, to leave
--
they're the military arm of the U.S. occupation -- and they're asking
for the
NGOs to leave. [The NGOs have] been in Haiti for decades and we've
still
had zero growth, zero infrastructure for public health and so forth and
so on,
because they do not have any accountability to the public, only to
their various
memberships, and those memberships are located overseas. It is the new
way
that, post-Cold War, the United States controls the internal affairs of
different
countries, by destroying the infrastructure and then by making the
country
dependent by bringing in charity as the new infrastructure. That
charity is
discriminatory because who that charity supports will be people who are
more
right wing, more about supporting U.S. imperialism... Folks don't quite
understand that the NGOs are very politicized because they're funded by
governments who are funding them for a particular reason.

"The Fanmi Lavalas movement is very, very powerful -- it
is one of the
most powerful political movements. It is the most powerful political
party if
they were allowed to run in the elections today. It's more than likely,
unless
they put up someone ridiculous, that they will win, because of the
struggle that
the Haitian people have had with regards to President Aristide. But
there are
very new and dynamic young lawyers and people who have distinguished
themselves in the last ten years outside of the Fanmi Lavalas party,
because
the party was forbidden to run in elections.

"We at the Haitian Lawyers' Leadership Network see and
have explained
to folks around the world that MINUSTAH, the UN Chapter 7 peace
enforcement force that has been in Haiti for seven years has left us
with no
development, and lots of human rights abuses, including bringing
cholera to
us in October 2010. This has killed over 10,000 poor Haitians, and has
infected all of our waterways and over 850,000 Haitians. That's what
the UN
humanitarians have brought us. And this is after the earthquake and the
amazing trauma of that. We are at a conjuncture right now, a
convergence,
where on January 12, 2015, it will mark the fifth year anniversary of
the
earthquake, and the dissolution of the parliament. Because of all of
that... we
see, finally, opportunity maybe to push to get rid of MINUSTAH, to try
to get
our sovereignty back, and everybody's pushing towards that right now."

Danto's appraisal is that events point to a strong
possibility of a
breakthrough for Haitians in their fight for empowerment and a
patriotic
government:

"Of course, it's always ominous when U.S. forces land in
Haiti, and we
are at this juncture. So many people have already died in the last 10
years
fighting to get to this point. But, I'll give you an example: there are
two young
lawyers, André Michel and Newton St-Juste, and this is
interesting because
they are asking Bill Clinton to account for the $10 billion that was
collected
from 2010. For 18 months he was a co-chair of the Interim Haiti
Recovery
Commission. And that's very exciting, because for the first time we're
looking
outward. It's not an internal fight, it's 'here are our traditional
enemies, here
is what they're doing.' It's clearer now, whereas before we didn't
really have
that. I think that's very interesting that we have this sort of
convergence
happening. Right now, January 12 is coming. Lots of media only come to
Haiti once a year, when the earthquake anniversary comes along, to do
these
little feel-good stories, but one of the big stories is what happened
to the
money, to that $10 billion.

"These two young Haitian lawyers... have been able to
get many Haitians
out of jail in the last three weeks because of the uprising of the
people. People
were going to the streets, and the U.S. occupational forces, led by the
Martelly
government, would arrest them and throw them in prison. Martelly has
been
ruling by decree since he got in. The international community ignored
it, and
emboldened it. But today, the forces of all this media are coming in
from all
over the world, coming to talk about what happened -- it's the fifth
anniversary: what has been done, how many people are still on the
streets, how
much housing, where has the money gone, what's going on with jobs and
so
forth. We have that conjuncture, we have the UN Security Council coming
to
Haiti on January 23 [to evaluate MINUSTAH], so you have all this
happening,
and at the same time you have these young Haitians who are in the
streets
almost every day.

"I see that this group of Haitians are much more
knowledgeable about
what the export economy is all about, how it destroys the local
economy;
they're much more cognizant that with the NGOs, 99 cents of every
dollar
they collect goes back to them, only one cent goes to the Haitian
government.
They understand all of that. They don't want that kind of aid, they
don't want
them there. I think that's a new thing and I hope that it continues, I
hope that
the United States doesn't brutally silence these people with death. I
think I see
a change. We hope not too many more people die. We hope that it's not a
bloodbath coming up in the next three weeks."

All Out to Support
the Haitian People's Fight to
Reclaim Their
Independence and Democracy!

(Interview edited for clarity and
length. Photos: TML, RT.)

Steadfast
Defender of Puerto Rico's Right to Independence

Worldwide
Campaign
for
Liberation
of
U.S. Political Prisoner Oscar López Rivera

A worldwide campaign for the
release of Puerto
Rican patriot and political prisoner Oscar López Rivera is
underway. Unjustly sentenced to 55 years in prison by the U.S.
colonial power for his just and principled stands to defend the
dignity and sovereignty of the Puerto Rican people, López Rivera
has been imprisoned for nearly 34 years, 12 of them in solitary
confinement. He has held to these positions in the face of this
hardship while at the same time being a model prisoner. This
steadfastness and fidelity to the cause of the Puerto Rican
people has been recognized throughout Latin America, the
Caribbean, the U.S. and around the world by all the forces who
are fighting for dignity, justice and independence and against
U.S. imperialism.

Uruguayan President José Mujica, in an open
letter to U.S.
President Barack Obama sent in early December 2014, highlighted
significant cases of unjust imprisonment by the U.S., including
López Rivera. A former guerilla, Mujica himself spent 13 years
as
a political prisoner. This letter led to negotiations with the
U.S. for the release of López Rivera, which are ongoing. On
December 24, Marcia Rivera, a prominent academic and relative of
López Rivera who lives in Uruguay, announced through her
Facebook
account that the liberation of the activist could come very soon.
Also that day, Puerto Rican Governor Alejandro Garcia Padilla
said his government is also urging the U.S. to free the political
activist.

On January 4, Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro
offered to send
the U.S. imprisoned opposition leader Leopoldo López in exchange
for the freedom of López Rivera. Leopoldo López was
arrested in
February after he helped launch a three-month wave of violent
opposition demonstrations seeking Maduro's ouster. This offer was a
response to remarks by U.S. Vice President Joe Biden to Maduro on
January 4 that the release of those Biden termed "Venezuelan
political prisoners" would be a prerequisite for any thaw in
relations between the two countries. During a televised speech
later that day, President Maduro said that "the only way I would
use my presidential powers [to release Mr. López] would be to
put
him on a plane to the United States, to leave him there, and that
they hand over Oscar López Rivera -- man for man." U.S. state
department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said on January 7 that the cases
of Leopoldo López and López Rivera are not comparable,
effectively rejecting the offer.

The president of the Committee for Human Rights in
Puerto Rico,
Eduardo Villanueva, in a January 5 Inter News Service item, said
that the past year has been very productive in the struggle for
the liberation of López Rivera. He noted that last year, several
national political figures were allowed to visit López Rivera in
prison in Terre Haute, Indiana. These included Alejandro García
Padilla of the Popular Democratic Party; Senator Maria de Lourdes
Santiago of the Puerto Rican Independence Party, along with the
party's General Secretary Juan Dalmau; the leaders of the
National Hostos Independence Movement, Alejandro Torres Rivera
and Wilma Reveron; and the Rev. Rafael Moreno of the Council of
Churches.

He stressed the importance of international
pronouncements in
recent times by political leaders such as presidents Daniel
Ortega of Nicaragua; Raúl Castro of Cuba; José Mujica of
Uruguay,
plus Nicolas Maduro and the late Hugo Chávez; and former
Spanish judge Baltasar Garzón. He also noted pronouncements by
the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC), the
International Social Forum in São Paolo and the Permanent
Conference of Political Parties of Latin America and the
Caribbean. "This has increased the pressure on the Obama
administration which knows it has to be consistent in what it
says about human rights," said Villanueva.

January 6 marked López Rivera's 72nd birthday.
The National
Boricua Human Rights Network and La Respuesta Magazine
organized a worldwide campaign to call for his freedom. The
campaign, "Birth of a Patriot, Star of a Nation," called for
100,000 messages to the official twitter accounts of U.S.
President Barack Obama, the White House and U.S. Justice
Department. The Network reports that the campaign reached 500,000
people.
Meanwhile, A vibrant celebration was held in
Puerto Rico to mark
his birthday, where many speakers highlighted how López Rivera
is
an inspiration to them and an exemplar of the revolutionary
spirit of the Puerto Rican people. January 6 is also "Three Kings
Day" or the twelfth day of Christmas, and in Puerto Rico the
day's celebrations were dedicated to the freedom of López
Rivera.

Top: Celebration of Oscar
López Rivera's 72nd birthday in San Juan, Puerto Rico,
January 6, 2015. Bottom: Three Kings event in San Juan.

Many cultural, religious and political personalities are
demanding the immediate release of López Rivera. In a December
12, 2014 item for CounterPunch, Matt Peppe, points out
some of these:

"[In early December] at a concert in San Juan, reggaeton
singer
René Pérez Joglar of the band Calle 13 brought
López's daughter
Clarissa on stage to read a letter pleading for her father's
release.

"After winning the silver medal in judo in the Central
American
and Caribbean games in November, Augusto Miranda told the press:
'I want to use this forum for all the people of Puerto Rico and
the United States. It's an abuse what they've done to Oscar
López
Rivera, political prisoner. It's time to give him his
freedom.'

"The President of the Universidad de Puerto Rico (UPR),
Uroyoán
Ramón Emeterio Walker, joined with students at the university to
call for López's release, citing 'humanitarian reasons' for what
Emeterio called a 'disproportionate' sentence.

"Human rights activists such as Nobel Peace Laureates
Archbishop
Desmond Tutu, Máiread Corrigan Maguire and Adolfo Pérez
Esquivel
have called on Obama to release López. [...] Tutu has said that
López's 'crime' was 'conspiracy to free his people from the
shackles of imperial justice.'"

In related news, fellow Puerto Rican political prisoner
Norberto
Gonzalez Claudio is expected to be released from a U.S. prison on
January 15. Given a five-year sentence in 2011, he was originally
scheduled for release on September 7, 2014.

TML Weekly reiterates the demand for the U.S. to
immediately free
Oscar López Rivera and to end its colonial domination of the
nation of Puerto Rico.

Oscar López Rivera,
Puerto Rican Independence Fighter

Born in 1943 in Puerto Rico, Oscar López Rivera
was a decorated
veteran who
received a medal for combat for fighting in the Vietnam War. After
returning
to Chicago where his family lived, he joined the struggle in the
defence of
Puerto Rican rights. He was a well-known community organizer who
attempted to improve living conditions in his community. He
participated in
acts of civil disobedience and peaceful militancy.

In 1976, he joined the underground struggle for the
independence of
Puerto Rico as a member of the National Liberation Armed Forces
(FALN).

In 1981, he was captured by the FBI on charges of
"seditious conspiracy"
and for belonging to the FALN. When he was captured he declared himself
a
"political prisoner," exercising his right under the First Protocol of
the Geneva
Convention of 1949, which recognizes this right for people detained in
the
context of colonial occupation.

According to the protocol,
a prisoner of war cannot be
judged as a
common criminal, much less if the cause of such procedure rests in acts
relating to participating in anti-colonial struggle. The claim was
ignored by the
U.S. government, which sentenced López Rivera to 55 years in
federal prison.
After
accusing the imprisoned Puerto Rican activist of attempting to flee
("conspiracy to escape"), the authorities extended his sentence to 70
years, 12
of which López Rivera has spent in total solitary confinement.

May 2014 marked the 33rd year in prison for López
Rivera. He is
the last
remaining of the 13 imprisoned FALN militants. Former U.S. President
Bill
Clinton offered a conditional pardon in 1999 to the rest of the 13 FALN
members, but López Rivera refused out of solidarity because the
condition for
his release included 10 more years in prison, a deal not offered to two
of his
other comrades.

"We had no other alternative to survive as a people. We
are talking about
a moment of great persecution and repression, and we wanted to survive.
We
used what they call 'armed propaganda' to carry the message of our
struggle,"
said López Rivera.

But he maintains that he has no regrets. "In my
experience, the first 18
years in prison have been terrible, so I thought that it would be
impossible to
be released on good behaviour after everything they've done to me," he
added.

On June 18, 2012, the United Nations Committee on
Decolonization
approved a resolution promoted by Cuba calling for recognition of the
right
of independence and self-determination of Puerto Rico. It also urged
the U.S.
to release the imprisoned independence fighters. The draft was
supported by
Bolivia, Ecuador, Nicaragua and Venezuela, and was passed by the
committee by consensus. The U.S. disregarded the UN resolution.

The Mandela of These Times?

The cause for freeing Oscar López Rivera has been
celebrated and supported by artists Calle 13,
Andy
Montañez, Ricky Martin, Chucho Avellanet, the filmmaker Jacobo
Morales,
intellectuals, and world leaders in social and political movements.

Advocates for López Rivera compare his case to
former South African
President
Nelson Mandela, who was imprisoned by a government that he considered
illegitimate.

"He has been in jail for 35 years. He is the Mandela of
these times. His
only crime was wanting an independent Puerto Rico ... He has been
subject to
ridicule, but he is the Latin American Mandela," Maduro said when he
was
leaving the UN Climate Change Summit which took place in New York.

The Venezuelan leader urged the U.S. to free this
independence fighter
whose only crime was "defending the star of dignity on the flag of our
sister
Puerto Rico."